This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Technology Portfolio Assessments Using a Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published November 2, 2004 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
This paper discusses the use of a Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm to optimize a technology portfolio for a commercial transport. When incorporating technologies into a conceptual design, there are often multiple competing objectives that determine the benefits and costs of a certain portfolio. The set of designs that achieves the best values of these objectives will fall along a Pareto front that outlines the tradeoffs which will give the optimal design. Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithms determine the Pareto set by giving higher priority to dominant portfolios in the evolutionary optimization techniques of selection and reproduction. When determining the final Pareto optimal set it is important to ensure that only compatible portfolios of technologies are present. The technology compatibility represents a constraint on the optimization that can be handled internal to the genetic algorithms or through imposed logic that eliminates incompatibilities through a procedure known as gene correction. In order to properly benchmark the Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm approach a comparison will be made with a traditional genetic algorithm utilizing a single fitness value incorporating the various objectives.
- Christopher M. Raczynski - Aerospace System Design Laboratory (ASDL), School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology
- Michelle R. Kirby - Aerospace System Design Laboratory (ASDL), School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology
- Dimitri N. Mavris - Aerospace System Design Laboratory (ASDL), School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology
CitationRaczynski, C., Kirby, M., and Mavris, D., "Technology Portfolio Assessments Using a Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm," SAE Technical Paper 2004-01-3144, 2004, https://doi.org/10.4271/2004-01-3144.
- Roth, B.A., Ender, T. and Mavris, D.N., “Technology Portfolio Assessments Using a Modified Genetic Algorithm Approach,” AIAA Paper 2002-5424, Sept. 2002.
- Roth, B., Graham, M., Mavris, D., Macsotai, N., “Adaptive Selection of Pareto Optimal Engine Technology Solution Sets,” Presented at the 2002 ICAS Conference, Toronto, ICAS2002-5.9.4.
- Gen, M. and Cheng, R., Genetic Algorithms and Engineering Design, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1997.
- Raczynski, C.M., Lewe, J.H., Kirby, M.R. and Mavris, D.N., “Technology Portfolio Assessments Using a Gene-Correction Genetic Algorithm,” AIAA Paper 2003-6731, Nov. 2003.
- Yang, B.S., Yeun, Y., and Ruy, W., “Managing Approximation Models in Multiobjective Optimization,” Stuct Mutlidisc Optim 24, 141–156.
- Kirby, M.R., “A Methodology for Technology Identification, Evaluation, and Selection in Conceptual and Preliminary Aircraft Design,” Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2001.
- “Current Market Outlook,” The Boeing Company [online], URL:http://www.boeing.com/commercial/cmo, [cited July 2003].
- McCullers, L.A., FLOPS User’s Guide Ver. 5.94. NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, Jan. 16, 1998.